Mailing-List: contact cloudstack-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of rohit.yadav@citrix.com
 designates 203.166.19.134 as permitted sender)
From: Rohit Yadav <rohit.yadav@citrix.com>
To: "cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org"
	<cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org>
Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2013 01:28:01 +0530
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Project Bylaws
Thread-Topic: [VOTE] Project Bylaws
Thread-Index: Ac3p7KTWYvrL0rgERR6buYd/JXlmQw==
Message-ID: <6203F3A4-2524-494D-B6B1-32FD4E93D11A@citrix.com>
References: 
 <CA+96GG5jz8Pv=TW6WJM9OP9ch3nPV44HA3j-okgeFokacxcM3w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CA+96GG6ospd++Lg7jJaYfU71XTL-RHtP1gL0TOP-cTTiXvijMQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <50E59A16.3030201@widodh.nl>
 <CA+96GG6ifZmdLsWT2SxBknE4gM1T-7D0xh905TdsCf=kqWnOng@mail.gmail.com>
 <F4395F97-116E-418B-AFCD-DEE3ECC9C8F1@citrix.com>
 <CA+96GG4sCnFCMdm2u5AFg3MWEtGWXiiT+03pHc7xDkh1u-csyQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CA+96GG4sCnFCMdm2u5AFg3MWEtGWXiiT+03pHc7xDkh1u-csyQ@mail.gmail.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0

+1 (binding)
Thanks for the reply, casting binding vote.

>>> 3. Veteos
>> Who can Veto? Timeframe when a veto is challenged?
>>=20
>=20
> The "who" is anyone that can cast a binding vote on an issue.
> Further, veto's are only applicable for "lazy consensus" style formal
> votes or technical decisions.
>=20
> I'm not sure I get your timeframe question though=85

The question was if someone challenges a vote by committing a binding veto =
-1, and if their veto is challenged (say the reasons were not obvious) and =
they are asked for reason(s) what should be the timeline for the person to =
reply/communicate. (say a case of someone trolling, the question was about =
handling trolls :)

Regards.

>=20
>> Regards.
>>=20
>>=20
>> On 03-Jan-2013, at 6:58 AM, Chip Childers <chip.childers@sungard.com<mai=
lto:chip.childers@sungard.com>> wrote:
>>=20
>> On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 9:47 AM, Wido den Hollander <wido@widodh.nl<mailt=
o:wido@widodh.nl>> wrote:
>> On 01/02/2013 09:52 PM, Chip Childers wrote:
>>=20
>> One quick follow up.
>>=20
>> If we approve the bylaw draft, I'll publish it to the website.
>> However, the document comes from the perspective of CloudStack being a
>> top level project (graduated from the incubator).  I'd likely include
>> a header note indicating this issue.  My preference is to approach the
>> process this way, so that we don't have to do an amendment process
>> during / after a potential / eventual graduation.
>>=20
>>=20
>> Not to be picky, but shouldn't this be changed then?
>>=20
>>=20
>> "3.1.1. Decisions regarding the project are made by votes on the primary
>> project
>>=20
>> development mailing list (cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org<mailto:clo=
udstack-dev@incubator.apache.org>)."
>>=20
>>=20
>> If you are writing like we are graduated should we keep the incubator
>> address there? Just to prevent this bylaws being copied and we being hau=
nted
>> by this e-mail address still being present in there.
>>=20
>> Other then that: +1 (binding)
>>=20
>> Wido
>>=20
>> -chip
>>=20
>>=20
>>=20
>>=20
>> Agreed.  I'll make that change in the wiki version.  Unless anyone
>> objects, I don't think this change represents a reason to restart the
>> vote.
>>=20